URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

 

Boucheron Holding SAS v. Na Shan

Claim Number: FA1605001675475

 

DOMAIN NAME

<boucheron.news>

 

PARTIES

Complainant:  Boucheron Holding SAS of Paris, France.

Complainant Representative:  Mathieu Lamotte

Complainant Representative:  INSIDERS of Paris, France.

 

Respondent:  Na Shan of Shen Yang, Liao Ning, International, CN.

 

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

Registries:  NEWS Registry

Registrars:  Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd. d/b/a HiChina (www.net.cn)

 

EXAMINER

The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.

 

Omar Haydar, as Examiner.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted: May 18, 2016

Commencement: May 18, 2016   

Default Date: June 2, 2016

 

Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules").

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.

 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Clear and convincing evidence.

 

FINDINGS and DISCUSSION

 

The complaint and findings relate to one domain <boucheron.news>. There is one Complainant and one (or more) Respondent, and no domain names were dismissed from this complaint.

 

The Respondent has registered the domain name <boucheron.news> on March 24, 2016.

 

Complainant, Boucheron Holding SAS, is the owner of trademark Boucheron, which it has registered in various jurisdictions since 1978, including China, where the Respondent is located. The Complainant has operated as the Boucheron brand for over a century.

 

Complainant has claimed that the domain name in question is identical to their protected word or mark.

 

Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.

1.    The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use.

2.    Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

3.    The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith.

 

The Examiner finds that Complainant has proven that the domain name is identical through evidence of the trademark registration. The Complainant’s trademark is a well established mark, in use for over one hundred years with international use and recognition as a retail brand.

 

The Examiner further finds that Complainant has proven that Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. The Complainant has neither licensed the trademark to the Respondent for use, nor has the Respondent made any claim to a legitimate right or interest to the name, whether by responding to this Complaint or vis-a-vis any content on their website.

 

The Examiner finds that the evidence proves the domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. The Examiner finds that the domain gives an automatic inference of affiliation to the entity holding the trademark, and would cause confusion amongst internet users into an assumption of an affiliation or relationship. (See Treeforms.com FA0010000095856)

 

DETERMINATION

After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that

the Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.

<boucheron.news>

 

Omar Haydar, Examiner

Dated:  June 07, 2016